 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups Platforms PCXboxPlayStationNintendoGames ActionStrategyRole Playing GamesSimulatorsSport Games |
Game Forum / Role Playing Games / Fallout / August 2004Fallout 2: I need a shovel!
I need a shovel! I used to have one but I must have traded it somewhere... whoops. Where can I get a new one from? I've had a look in the stores at Den and Klamath, and at the amenities office in Vault City, but to no avail. Does anyone know where I can get one?  SignatureToby ~~FA: Quantum Redshift & Luigi's Mansion ~~http://tinyurl.com/34xwk ~~Starts at 10p Places you can find a shovel: - in arroyo, near the house of your aunt( the one who never liked you) - in the den, in the bookcase of the house where the ghost wanders at night - in new reno, with the first quest from the salvatores you can get one - probably in some shops or merchants you encounter while traveling, but i don't know that for sure > I need a shovel! I used to have one but I must have traded it > somewhere... whoops. Where can I get a new one from? I've had a look in > the stores at Den and Klamath, and at the amenities office in Vault City, > but to no avail. > > Does anyone know where I can get one? > Places you can find a shovel: > - in arroyo, near the house of your aunt( the one who never liked you) [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > > > Does anyone know where I can get one? There's also one in modoc, and maybe one at the broken hills (not sure about this last one though) Signaturecaffeine (at) altern :: org Thanks for the help fellas. I'm a little concerned how you managed to know the answer to my question. Do you really remember where things are that accurately in the game? How many times have you played it? :D In the end I found a shovel at Happy Harry's, in the courtyard outside Vault City. Amusingly, as soon as I used it to dig up a grave, I found another shovel buried in the grave. Now, why on earth... :) SignatureToby ~~FA: Quantum Redshift & Luigi's Mansion ~~http://tinyurl.com/34xwk ~~Starts at 10p >Thanks for the help fellas. I'm a little concerned how you managed to >know the answer to my question. Do you really remember where things are [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Vault City. Amusingly, as soon as I used it to dig up a grave, I found >another shovel buried in the grave. Now, why on earth... :) So he could dig himself out? Signature.-'`-. / | | \ / | | \ |___|_|__ | ||<o>| <o>`| || J_ )| `|`-'__`-'|/ | `--' | .-| |_ .-' \ / | |`-. .-' `. /| | \ / ````' | | \ |_____ | | L .-' ___ `-. F F | | ||`-.___ .'.-' | `-. `. J J / | || _.> / /| | |`. \ | | |/ | ||_.-' / / | | | `. `. F F | |============================== J / | | | \ L J J | | `:::::::. `:::::::. FJ | | | |L J/ / | \ :::::::. :::::::\ J |() | () | () | () | J L/ | | ::::::: :::::::L | F | .-'_ \ | | LJ | / L :::::::: :::::::J | L | / \\ | | | L | | :::::::: ::::::::L | L || ):|| | | | /| L :::::::: ::::::::| J | ||:._.'::|| | | |----' | | :::::::: ::::::::| .---. J | |J:::::::|| | | | _/\ | :::::::: ::::::::| /(@ o`. LJ | \:::::/ | | | |---'\ | | :::::::: ::::::::| | /^^^ J L | `-:-' | | | F | \ | J :::::::: ::::::::| \ . \vvv LJ()| () | () | () | F F | \ \--._L :::::::: ::::::::| \ `--' J \ | | | | J J \ | | :::::::: ::::::::| \ `. \ \| | | | / / | | | :::::::: ::::::::| L \ \ \ | | |/ /| | | .-'| :::::::: ::::::::| | \ `.`. | | .'.' | | |/ /`L :::::::: ::::::::| | L | `.`-.____|.-'.-' | | | <`. \ :::::::: ::::::::| | | | | `-.______.-' | \| |_`::\ `. :::::::: ::::::::| F | | J\ | | | | /: \::. \:::::::: ::::::::F / | | L\|--| | _.--|:: `::\ `.:::::: .:::::::J / F J J |\\|-.____ |__.-' |: \::. \:::: ::::::::F .' J L \| >|| `--' J |' .`::\ `.:' .::::::::/ .' F J |//JJ | L |---. .--\::. \---. .---. <---< J L |< |J |\=/| ( _ \=/ _ `::\ `. \=/ _ \=/ _ \ / J |\\|J | | / )_) | (_) \::. \ | (_) | (_) | / \ |--|J |//\\ / //\ //`::\ `./\ //\ / .' \| |L ` )/ )` `' '|`---// `---// `\::. \ `---// `---' .' VK________| L_\ ' /___/ ' | |___//______//_____`::\ |___//_________.'_________ F F J`` -'| | | | | \:_| `-' | "" | J ` | | | L | |\ |\ /| /| |\ /| | | \ | | \ | \ // // | \ || |\ J | `. | ||\\ ||\\ // // ||\\ || || L F )`---\ || >> || \\ / | << || \\ || || | J / `. ||// || || //|| \\ || || || || J J ( `-. |// | \ || |/ || \\ | \ || || || `-.__/ `---. `. |<< ||\\|| || >> ||\\|| || || | J `. ) ||\\ || \ | || // || \ | || || / | `-----' || >> || || || // || || \\ || / F ||// || || || << || || \\|| J J | / |/ || |/ \\ |/ || \ | J | |/ \| \| \| \| `-.-' K I N G O F T H E M O N S T E R S > Thanks for the help fellas. I'm a little concerned how you managed to > know the answer to my question. Do you really remember where things are > that accurately in the game? How many times have you played it? :D die hard fans like myself, who have played the game more than a few times, can probaably remember where most things in the game are!! > > Thanks for the help fellas. I'm a little concerned how you managed to > > know the answer to my question. Do you really remember where things are > > that accurately in the game? How many times have you played it? :D > > die hard fans like myself, who have played the game more than a few times, > can probaably remember where most things in the game are!! What can you say, it's just an unforgetable game... > > > Thanks for the help fellas. I'm a little concerned how you managed to > > > know the answer to my question. Do you really remember where things are [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > What can you say, it's just an unforgetable game... i can run through both games in various ways, and have no problems at all, say, did you ever figure out the trick to get power armour mk 2 and a plasma rifle right at the start of the game? getting power armour mk2 and plasma rifle at the beginning isn't difficult, just mess with the save games a bit, but then again, if you mess with the savegames, just give yourself that new gauss rifle with plenty of ammo and the bozar, and,.... then you can scream KEWL! every five seconds while riddling an ant ful of holes but then again, than would be cheating,... > > > > Thanks for the help fellas. I'm a little concerned how you managed to > > > > know the answer to my question. Do you really remember where things [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > say, did you ever figure out the trick to get power armour mk 2 and a plasma > rifle right at the start of the game? > getting power armour mk2 and plasma rifle at the beginning isn't difficult, > just mess with the save games a bit, but then again, if you mess with the > savegames, just give yourself that new gauss rifle with plenty of ammo and > the bozar, and,.... then you can scream KEWL! every five seconds while > riddling an ant ful of holes IMHO we're not talking about savegame editing. You can get a power armor and plasma rifle "legally" in the game - by using knowledge from previous games. > > getting power armour mk2 and plasma rifle at the beginning isn't > difficult, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > armor and plasma rifle "legally" in the game - by using knowledge from > previous games. If "getting power armor and plasma rifle at the start of the game" means going straight to Navarro when you exit the village, that's downright suicidal IMHO. Or maybe you're talking about the stuff behind the elevator in the toxic caves (can't remember what there was in there - and you still need electronic lockpicking gear, which you can't find early in the game). Or maybe I'm missing something (though I think I must have played it to the end half a dozen times...), in which case I'd really appreciate any hint... Signaturecaffeine (at) altern :: org > > > getting power armour mk2 and plasma rifle at the beginning isn't > > difficult, [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > the end half a dozen times...), in which case I'd really appreciate any > hint... I just tried this... SPOILER ALERT! made a sneaky, high intelligence, low charisma character (I think it doesn't matter really, but just for the record). went directly from arroyo to sanfransisco. talked to brotherhood of steel guy until he gave me quest for vertibird plans - and more importantly; the location of navarro. went to navarro. avoid chris or just say you're leaving... behind chris is a shack with a secret entrance to underground base. There's also an air-filtration entrance in the woods on the left, but you need a keycard from gecko, I think... down through the shaft and through the long hall and right across the hall with the round elevator is a room full of goodies including a plasma rifle and powerarmor 2 and more ammo than you can carry... no one attacked me except for random encounters, especially near navarro, had to load several times during my travels and saved in mid-travel (click on green triangle) a few times... If you wanna avoid the encounters as much as possible I guess you could increase your outdoors man skill... there, carved out in stone... but I warn you... the game will probably suck if you do this... least I'm going to use it... There's a speed demo here, some guy complets fallout2 in like 20 minutes or so, without saving or loading... he doesn't go to navarro though because random encounters around there are too dangerous, instead he takes advantage of a money-replenishing "feature" on a sanfran merchant and gets power armor mk1 there, I think... http://www.planetquake.com/sda/other/fallout2.html silly, but doable... apparently... > I just tried this... SPOILER ALERT! > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > but I warn you... the game will probably suck if you do this... least I'm > going to use it... thats the way to do it, makes you nearly level 10, and practiclly unstopabble, it give you a great feeling of POWER, i love doing that!! > > there, carved out in stone... > > but I warn you... the game will probably suck if you do this... least I'm > > going to use it... > > thats the way to do it, makes you nearly level 10, and practiclly > unstopabble, it give you a great feeling of POWER, i love doing that!! every man his pleasure... but seriously, if you by some mishap of (un)fortune went straight for the super-weapon and outfit and level-skipping xp boosts that you get down south on the map, the first time you played it, well then you haven't enjoyed the game at all... Fallout2 is not that open really, it's pretty linear when it comes to it, because you were never "meant" to skip places... The quests were not designed for jumping around... I mean, does it make sense that you can go do a 5000xp quest with ease short after beginning the game and then go back and be in a world of hurt with a 500xp one? of course not... but it can be difficult to design a proper quest system in a level-based game, I'll give them that... > > > there, carved out in stone... > > > but I warn you... the game will probably suck if you do this... least [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > but it can be difficult to design a proper quest system in a level-based > game, I'll give them that... on no, it was the third time i played before i thought about it, and it worked, but it was not easy, not by a long shot!! > on no, it was the third time i played before i thought about it, and it > worked, but it was not easy, not by a long shot!! what about it wasn't easy? - the random encounters? just 15 minutes from temple of trials and a few reloads and you have powerarmor 2... > > on no, it was the third time i played before i thought about it, and it > > worked, but it was not easy, not by a long shot!! > > what about it wasn't easy? - the random encounters? > just 15 minutes from temple of trials and a few reloads and you have > powerarmor 2... the random encounters, getting in the front, saving the deathclaw, getting the vertibird plans, killing to commander and the doc, rescuing the dog, all this with a low lvl char!! > > > on no, it was the third time i played before i thought about it, and it > > > worked, but it was not easy, not by a long shot!! [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > the vertibird plans, killing to commander and the doc, rescuing the dog, all > this with a low lvl char!! you obviously didn't read my walkthrough properly. :) the random encounters I can't do anything about, but you don't have to get in through the front where the guards are who will ask for a password - which you will only get if you can pursuade chris (requires combat armor?) behind chris ( the guy at the gas station in purple robe), is a shack with a wooden lid on.... sneak through there and there you go, just leave the same way and go back to klamath and kill rats in powerarmor mk2...... ... .... ...... ... ... ... (note the dots!!!) ... hows that for difficulty? > > > > on no, it was the third time i played before i thought about it, and > it [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > ...... ... ... ... (note the dots!!!) ... > hows that for difficulty? no i didnt read your walktrhrough because i have been doing it like that for years, and its great fun, just a little bit hard >> > there, carved out in stone... >> > but I warn you... the game will probably suck if you do this... least [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >but it can be difficult to design a proper quest system in a level-based >game, I'll give them that... You could base XP rewards on the player's level so an easy quest always gives you a relatively small amount of XP and a hard quest always gives you a relatively large amount of XP. But players can still get very good equipment when they are not supposed to and rely on it to complete the difficult quests. So equipment should not be predetermined either and it should be generated at a reasonable power depending on how advanced the player is. This is kind of how it is done in roguelikes. Rewards are loot which is generated according to the dungeon depth that the player is on and the player is prevented from getting the best equipment early on by the deadlier monsters and hazards further down. The player can control how risky they want to be which determines how fast they can advance. Playing risky and advancing quickly has an added reward. Experience rewards from kills are determined by the difference between the level of the player and the depth (expected depth where the monster USUALLY appears not necessarily where it does) and level of the monster. Killing a wolf at level 1 might be worth 50 XP but at level 50 it would be worth 0.00000000000001 XP. Roguelikes are entirely free roaming and have almost no plot. RPGs with a lot of plot are usually very linear. Plot is a prewritten, fixed thing and usually tied heavily to quests so trying to mix freedom with plot creates the potential of unbalanced gameplay. Quest rewards and equipment and other character development stuff needs to be uncoupled from the linear stuff like plot if you want a free roaming game with a strong plot. This would take a lot of serious thought. Almost all games are made by filling in a traditional game structure with your own game elements. Eg an RPG developer looks at games like Fallout and Baldur's Gate and replaces the plot, quests, characters, monsters with their own. They change these things but not really how they work together. The player completes predetermined quests to progress the predetermined plot. Back to the loot thing. In a roguelike each weapon type such as dagger, long sword, crossbow etc will always have the same base xdy damage, weight and description. But it can have random modifiers and special effects. A weapon is generated in a dungeon depending on it's "depth" or how far into the game it should appear. This value depends on it's base depth for the item type (you are more likely to find a wooden club than a great axe on level 1) and also all the modifiers and effects it has. Events and quests can be generated the same way. A large list of basic types with basic attributes is modified in a large variety of ways and appear at an place appropriate to how difficult they end up being. Many free roaming games already do this. The real challenge is to string those random quests and events into a real story. There's a roguelike being developed called GearHead which attempts this to some extent. Players start out with a random background and main objective (or set of possible objectives) and the details are generated randomly. More dialogue and other plot enriching elements can be added and made to tie together in the same way. It just takes more effort. Like chess each possible move through the plot has to be planned. The early roguelike games were pretty linear. You start at the top of the dungeon and you work your way down to the end of the game at the bottom. If you go down the game gets harder and if you go up it gets easier but you have to go down eventually to win. Then multiple dungeons and routes the to end of the game were added. What I would like to see more of in RPGs is choice. Not necessarily about the order in which to do quests but the way to do things. So many times in RPGs I have said "this problem would be solved if I just killed this guy or blew this up" but the game doesn't let you or it lets you but doesn't recognise it as a valid solution. It's not just a "wouldn't it be cool if" thing for me. It's one of the main obstacles to enjoying a game and it is one of the most enjoyable things in a game when I do try something the game doesn't explicitly prompt me to do and it works. It's letting me roleplay how I want to. Games have so much more potential for this kind of thing than any other media but a lot of games might as well limit the interaction to turning the page to see what the writer wants to happen next. Games aren't books. Blah blah blah. > You could base XP rewards on the player's level so an easy quest always > gives you a relatively small amount of XP and a hard quest always gives [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > easier but you have to go down eventually to win. Then multiple dungeons > and routes the to end of the game were added. Yeah this is a solution, but randomized loot also sounds kinda sucky... There can't really be static loot (if I may call it that). Eg a power armor 2 in navarro base... Instead you will find a powerarmor "anywhere" based on chance... Althought you can limit it to specific areas of course, but it still takes away some depth if you can find it "whereever" when there are more 'obvious' locations where it Should be located; at the center of the bad guys base, of course. I definately wanna find "Spiders Bane" sword in the spiders nest (Baldurs Gate) and not some other place less fitting. Why would I fight my way through the most gargantuan monster as soon as I can, if all I find is some "leveled" garbage? Sure it may still a bit be better because of the increased risk, but it won't be the best of the best. And worse yet, later on find something better on a lesser monster (doh)... (*see bottom of this post for some thoughts on something of a solution to what difficulty monsters should have and more). The Elder Scrolls series (Morrowind etc) has both random and static loot... Most containers (chests, barrels, etc) are completely randomized based on your level with small luck percentages of recieving something better than "leveled". Thing is if you reload your game before checking what was in the chest the content of the chest will change... And that's that's just plain ridiculous. Sure loading and saving is already sort of a "cheat", but it doesn't have to be that freaking exploitable. > What I would like to see more of in RPGs is choice. Not necessarily > about the order in which to do quests but the way to do things. So many Yes, I would like to see choice too, but unfortunately each choice is pretty much equal to exponential developement time and if you do cross-branching as well, that's double exponentiality, and while that may not be so bad per se, it is just Time they don't have... Thanks to the hardware industry and Carmark type folks the comercial game industry is pushed in the direction of smaller and prettier... and yet development costs soars, despite higher level languages, all the resources you could dream of in form of purchasable assets (engines) and open source enmassing like never before. If content creation is really the culprit in all of this (although I think it's bull), then it will have to be made more automated... And if this hasn't already been thought about then it's about time that someone does... Because I'll be damned if I'm going to buy that 15 minute doom3 game... heh damned... nevermind. *okay, here's something about my thoughts on "XP", "Leveling" and difficulty based on it, if you're arsed to read it... Basicly I would prefer if monsters weren't better "down south" like in fallout. Sure we should still have the uber-deadly enclave patrols in certain parts of the area and such. What I'm talking about though is the commoners shouldn't have laser guns down south when those up north are fighting with sticks and spears, and then eventually making the ones with spears pose zero threat to you because you are at a really high level... Spears still hurt humans no matter how much "experience" (XP) you have. I'd like that to still be true. Because I hate cliff racers. and rats. and goblins that you will undoubtly meet again even after you turned uber and they will just be a pain in the a.s and you wish you'd never seen them... They pose no threat to you any more and that sucks. It's not real. it's not even unreal, it's just stupid. That's why I personally feel the current Level and XP based systems are crap. If there is no "levels" of any sort though it may be difficult to keep you from going straight through the game though by skipping areas, so we do sort of need them in non-linear games. However what should stop you is quest-progress (particularly main campaign). That would be linear, but that's ok as long as you have lots of "choice". And the way to keep you from skipping areas should be knowledge of them. Eg can only get to navarro through brotherhood guy - this is a bad example though because he seems to know you even if you just left arroyo. It would make more sense if he wouldn't talk before you had a certain high level of reputation. So that's badly scripted but the principle is good enough. So finally the way to keep you from getting the knowledge should be simply "hard work". Fighting, traveling, talking, interacting etc. Thus theoretically removing all need for real "XP" / "Leveling", and making the the story and experiences come into focus instead of endless xp-mining... However, this will take some serious thought and scripting if to keep it from being too linear (but doable none the less). So therefor in combination with the above I will suggest a slightly different XP system that will keep you - and get this - from becoming Too Powerful. Basicly it should just keep you "human", yet still with skills of your chosing. You can still be powerful, eg incredible sniper, but you will then lack in most other things and have a hell of a time doing them... Sacrificing one proficiency with another, so to speak. here's how... Let me just start by saying I believe our characters could be defined by things somewhat more profound than statistics and numbers... To the viewer that is. Fallout tried having something else as well; Traits. Okay, how traits are different from plain statistics is debateable... But I find it vastly more intesting to have a "you're jinxed" or "sharp shooter" or "you're weak but agile" and so on than "x% to whatever". Especially traits that are both Positive AND Negative are fun. I'd like to see a learning and unlearning "You are what you eat, do and experience" system. That would be a system you don't really control unless you really try to... It could work with the S.P.E.C.I.A.L categories (intelligence, agility, perception etc). Each trait would be under one or several of these categories. Like 'Sharp Shooter' trait would be under mainly Perception and some parts Intelligence, or similar. So when you find yourself only using long range weapons, and firing at objects only/mainly from a good distance your perception would go up a lot and once it's really high (100% max) you would get traits that would define your character based on that, like: 'Sharp Shooter' if really high perception, using slow rate of fire but high precision. 'Chaingun Master' with average perception + high strength if you burst a lot. 'Pistolero' at average perception + moderate agility (?), if you are more into single-fire handguns. etc.. However you should never be able to get 100% of everything, because then you would end up with all traits and that's no good either. So lets say there are seven categories (Strength, Perception, Endurance, Charisma, Intelligence, Agility and Luck), you should be a maximum of 7x100% * 0.5 = 350 allocated points total, ever. (the 0.5 could be anything, just using example here). So with those numbers you could tops have 50% of everything if you wanted to have an all-around character. And this is where I'd like to see "unlearning" come in, because that would allow you to mold your character further than: "this is it, no more xp for you"... So if you find yourself ONLY shooting at long ranges your perception will go to 100% and all your other skills will go Down to average of 40odd%. If you wanted to have a 100% intelligent and a 100% perception then the rest of your skills would average over the last 150 points. (350-100-100 = 150), (30% avg). Personally I think it would be fine if you could also go to Minus -100%... eg: 100% luck could be never unlucky. 50% luck would be fairly lucky but still occasionally unlucky. 0% would be 50/50 -100% would be incredibly freakin unlucky. you pick up a gun and it WILL go off in your face. or something... Very easy to understand system really. What Luck in this system would be based on I'm not too sure though. Maybe if you do things very bad, fail a lot, do jinxed stuff, wear jinxed items, you will end up with "jinxed" character. Or instead if you have low intelligence and low agility you're likely to end up less lucky too cos you're clumbsy. or something.... Okay so you may now be going: "why, why and why?, I like pushing the +/- dials and selecting traits on every other level on my character sheet!" But isn't this "feature" really quite redundant? You play the style that you that you picked anyway, don't you? And if you don't, you wish you did, right? And worst of all - now you have no way to undo it... If you want to play a sniper, but give him all the skills that has nothing to do with sniping, well, you'll have a very hard time hitting anything... Why would you want to play an incredibly crappy sniper? Sounds like a bad comedy movie... I'm a sniper. An incredibly bad sniper. Rated R for: Retarded... Instead - you are what you do and you're good at what you do a lot. And you could still end up doing the opposite of what you're good at, but then, depending on how long it takes, you would eventually end up being good at that instead. The system may be slightly arcady though since you now no longer really have control over it (you can still have a character sheet, but with no functionality), but at the same time I believe this would really just emphasise Role Playing - you are what you do, not what you think you are or what your character sheet says... So in sense you can end up being a great sniper, but being a sniper doesn't necessarily mean being a good short-ranged shooter, so you will lack in other skills and that's where the challenges will arrise, and keep the game challenging no matter how long you play. and then for gods sakes have random encounters that doesn't just involve combat or barter skills... and make the terrain (obstruction) so that they often have to be done in specific ways and you can't just snipe your way out of everything. ok jeez... if there's missing a sentence somewhere, sue me... thoughts? > *okay, here's something about my thoughts on "XP", "Leveling" and > difficulty based on it, if you're arsed to read it... [quoted text clipped - 150 lines] > > thoughts? I like it, very well thought out and presented. You need to go work for a software house ;-) preferably one that specialises in CRPG's. Cheers Hamish SignatureGo Strugglers In this life there are only two tragedies. One is not getting what one wants. The other is getting it. >>You could base XP rewards on the player's ... > ... > thoughts? Time and summer allergies allow only a 'relitively' short or shallow reply. Your assessment of the limits of the "open" ended "wandering", that must stay with in spitting distance of the plot line "trail". is accurate, so it's a good base to build up a different model for XP point generation and so forth. When XP point rewards and "loot" reaping are linked by a logical anticipation of what is possible at that moment on the stair steps of leveling, then the player is shepherded, nudged, nipped, brow beat, and bitch slapped to travel " ' along the path of the beam ' ". There is a spoiler here in this thread that is usually exploited on a second or, ... fifth replay of FO2. I think it's the replay ability of the FO's that have given them the legend of being "open". It's the ability to craft the Player Character to negotiate the varying social and combat situations that aides in taking on say .. Redding before one has taken out the Raider Base. Your proposed PC development system and it's example of a sniper would encourage the need to recruit the NPC's as more than pack mules. Ian and or Sulik would provide the close support needed to watch your PC back, assuming that their accuracy improved. Not sure that Ian's did in FO, but Sulik's small weapons performance did improve in FO2 so that auto was an option. There are still sadly comic threads on NMA where the friendly fire issue is replayed like some tragic trauma of childhood. The anger and resentment seemed too ingrained to be based on a mishap in a computer game that could have been "fixed" by going back to a recent 'save'. Some still want to be "perfect" squad level technicians at any level of the skill, technology, or economics tree. Yes, I am a 'fan' of friendly fire, because there were in game workarounds or STRUCTURED SOLUTIONS to the problem. Solutions like the large hand guns for Ian, and Tandy if one got the spoiler of when to 'steal' the weak weapons from her inventory. In FO2 the leveling up improved skills (judgment and accuracy) for Sulik and Marcus, and Marcus's Energy Weapon skills allowed him to use that Turbo Laser after all that experimental excitement of what Big F'ing Gun he'd pull and to what disastrous or illustrious effect. My limited experience with firearms may give me a real world respect of the possibility of jamming, misfire, missing, and hitting an unintended traget. The level of accuracy attributed to PC's and NPC's at early skill levels seems guided by dramatic aspirations and hysterical demands for a mythic proficency of the 'heroes'. A combat proficency skill, and or combat participation skill (morale, fatigue and time dependant) might drive home issues behind that confection or 'fudge' called friendly fire. Maybe a Python inspired 'run away!' script could be augmented by an effort first to "Duck And Cover" then the arm chair squad leaders would DEMAND auto fire if it gave the NPC's the confidence to return fire and not start digging, or running for China. The party members would be less pack mules and 'meat shields' if their skill contributions allowed your sniper to hone that point target deadliness. The group outdoorsmanship could have improved some with an Ian and a Sulik, and could have been better with a Tyco and a Cassidy. If the learning could be transferred from the 'party' to the PC, much like how bonus hand to hand skills were provided by stationary NPC's in FO and FO2, than the lone PC 'ranger' could cultivate a network of - mentors - the mobile NPC's could be 'parked' or recruited as necessary. I like the learn by doing idea, and I recall an Amiga era title that looked like a 'Gold Box' clone. Possibly it was European. Performing certain attacks in combat rewarded the ancillary attributes. Hand to hand and melee weapons improved the base physical strength and agility. This improvement in strength and agility allowed your 'tech boy' or 'doc' to equip a heavier fire weapon, and have enough 'hand - eye" coordination to shoot with effect when that was needed in the end game. The baggage train ... An interesting reward for loading down your character and the NPC's with loot, to exploit the barter economics, might be, not necessarily gaining a point in strength or endurance, or points in Outdoorsman (if packing and marching skills are deemed 'outdoorsman-like'), but the increase of weight , (and shape? please no tetrus clone back back grids!) that can be hypothetically carried. Perhaps there would be, how the load would affect the march progress and at what price of resources, as in the necessity of more than one canteen. Perhaps the "packs' would be 'dropped' in combat with an option to repack on an area inventory spread sheet after the conclusion. Nearness to 'impedimenta' drop points would validate whether the NPC or PC could access this resource and at what "movement point' or time "t" during action. Time's up! 4too >>You could base XP rewards on the player's ... > ... > thoughts? Time and summer allergies allow only a 'relitively' short or shallow reply. Your assessment of the limits of the "open" ended "wandering", that must stay with in spitting distance of the plot line "trail". is accurate, so it's a good base to build up a different model for XP point generation and so forth. When XP point rewards and "loot" reaping are linked by a logical anticipation of what is possible at that moment on the stair steps of leveling, then the player is shepherded, nudged, nipped, brow beat, and bitch slapped to travel " ' along the path of the beam ' ". There is a spoiler here in this thread that is usually exploited on a second or, ... fifth replay of FO2. I think it's the replay ability of the FO's that have given them the legend of being "open". It's the ability to craft the Player Character to negotiate the varying social and combat situations that aides in taking on say .. Redding before one has taken out the Raider Base. Your proposed PC development system and it's example of a sniper would encourage the need to recruit the NPC's as more than pack mules. Ian and or Sulik would provide the close support needed to watch your PC back, assuming that their accuracy improved. Not sure that Ian's did in FO, but Sulik's small weapons performance did improve in FO2 so that auto was an option. There are still sadly comic threads on NMA where the friendly fire issue is replayed like some tragic trauma of childhood. The anger and resentment seemed too ingrained to be based on a mishap in a computer game that could have been "fixed" by going back to a recent 'save'. Some still want to be "perfect" squad level technicians at any level of the skill, technology, or economics tree. Yes, I am a 'fan' of friendly fire, because there were in game workarounds or STRUCTURED SOLUTIONS to the problem. Solutions like the large hand guns for Ian, and Tandy if one got the spoiler of when to 'steal' the weak weapons from her inventory. In FO2 the leveling up improved skills (judgment and accuracy) for Sulik and Marcus, and Marcus's Energy Weapon skills allowed him to use that Turbo Laser after all that experimental excitement of what Big F'ing Gun he'd pull and to what disastrous or illustrious effect. My limited experience with firearms may give me a real world respect of the possibility of jamming, misfire, missing, and hitting an unintended target. The level of accuracy attributed to PC's and NPC's at early skill levels seems guided by dramatic aspirations and hysterical demands for a mythic proficency of the 'heroes'. A combat proficency skill, and or combat participation skill (morale, fatigue and time dependant) might drive home issues behind that confection or 'fudge' called friendly fire. Maybe a Python inspired 'run away!' script could be augmented by an effort first to "Duck And Cover" then the arm chair squad leaders would DEMAND auto fire if it gave the NPC's the confidence to return fire and not start digging, or running for China. The party members would be less pack mules and 'meat shields' if their skill contributions allowed your sniper to hone that point target deadliness. The group outdoorsmanship could have improved some with an Ian and a Sulik, and could have been better with a Tyco and a Cassidy. If the learning could be transferred from the 'party' to the PC, much like how bonus hand to hand skills were provided by stationary NPC's in FO and FO2, than the lone PC 'ranger' could cultivate a network of - mentors - the mobile NPC's could be 'parked' or recruited as necessary. I like the learn by doing idea, and I recall an Amiga era title that looked like a 'Gold Box' clone. Possibly it was European. Performing certain attacks in combat rewarded the ancillary attributes. Hand to hand and melee weapons improved the base physical strength and agility. This improvement in strength and agility allowed your 'tech boy' or 'doc' to equip a heavier fire weapon, and have enough 'hand - eye" coordination to shoot with effect when that was needed in the end game. The baggage train ... An interesting reward for loading down your character and the NPC's with loot, to exploit the barter economics, might be, not necessarily gaining a point in strength or endurance, or points in Outdoorsman (if packing and marching skills are deemed 'outdoorsman-like'), but the increase of weight , (and shape? please no tetrus clone back back grids!) that can be hypothetically carried. Perhaps there would be, how the load would affect the march progress and at what price of resources, as in the necessity of more than one canteen. Perhaps the "packs' would be 'dropped' in combat with an option to repack on an area inventory spread sheet after the conclusion. Nearness to 'impedimenta' drop points would validate whether the NPC or PC could access this resource and at what "movement point' or time "t" during action. Time's up! 4too >>You could base XP rewards on the player's ... > ... > thoughts? Time and summer allergies allow only a 'relitively' short or shallow reply. Your assessment of the limits of the "open" ended "wandering", that must stay with in spitting distance of the plot line "trail". is accurate, so it's a good base to build up a different model for XP point generation and so forth. When XP point rewards and "loot" reaping are linked by a logical anticipation of what is possible at that moment on the stair steps of leveling, then the player is shepherded, nudged, nipped, brow beat, and bitch slapped to travel " ' along the path of the beam ' ". There is a spoiler here in this thread that is usually exploited on a second or, ... fifth replay of FO2. I think it's the replay ability of the FO's that have given them the legend of being "open". It's the ability to craft the Player Character to negotiate the varying social and combat situations that aides in taking on say .. Redding before one has taken out the Raider Base. Your proposed PC development system and it's example of a sniper would encourage the need to recruit the NPC's as more than pack mules. Ian and or Sulik would provide the close support needed to watch your PC back, assuming that their accuracy improved. Not sure that Ian's did in FO, but Sulik's small weapons performance did improve in FO2 so that auto was an option. There are still sadly comic threads on NMA where the friendly fire issue is replayed like some tragic trauma of childhood. The anger and resentment seemed too ingrained to be based on a mishap in a computer game that could have been "fixed" by going back to a recent 'save'. Some still want to be "perfect" squad level technicians at any level of the skill, technology, or economics tree. Yes, I am a 'fan' of friendly fire, because there were in game workarounds or STRUCTURED SOLUTIONS to the problem. Solutions like the large hand guns for Ian, and Tandy if one got the spoiler of when to 'steal' the weak weapons from her inventory. In FO2 the leveling up improved skills (judgment and accuracy) for Sulik and Marcus, and Marcus's Energy Weapon skills allowed him to use that Turbo Laser after all that experimental excitement of what Big F'ing Gun he'd pull and to what disastrous or illustrious effect. My limited experience with firearms may give me a real world respect of the possibility of jamming, misfire, missing, and hitting an unintended target. The level of accuracy attributed to PC's and NPC's at early skill levels seems guided by dramatic aspirations and hysterical demands for a mythic proficency of the 'heroes'. A combat proficency skill, and or combat participation skill (morale, fatigue and time dependant) might drive home issues behind that confection or 'fudge' called friendly fire. Maybe a Python inspired 'run away!' script could be augmented by an effort first to "Duck And Cover" then the arm chair squad leaders would DEMAND auto fire if it gave the NPC's the confidence to return fire and not start digging, or running for China. The party members would be less pack mules and 'meat shields' if their skill contributions allowed your sniper to hone that point target deadliness. The group outdoorsmanship could have improved some with an Ian and a Sulik, and could have been better with a Tyco and a Cassidy. If the learning could be transferred from the 'party' to the PC, much like how bonus hand to hand skills were provided by stationary NPC's in FO and FO2, than the lone PC 'ranger' could cultivate a network of - mentors - the mobile NPC's could be 'parked' or recruited as necessary. I like the learn by doing idea, and I recall an Amiga era title that looked like a 'Gold Box' clone. Possibly it was European. Performing certain attacks in combat rewarded the ancillary attributes. Hand to hand and melee weapons improved the base physical strength and agility. This improvement in strength and agility allowed your 'tech boy' or 'doc' to equip a heavier fire weapon, and have enough 'hand - eye" coordination to shoot with effect when that was needed in the end game. The baggage train ... An interesting reward for loading down your character and the NPC's with loot, to exploit the barter economics, might be, not necessarily gaining a point in strength or endurance, or points in Outdoorsman (if packing and marching skills are deemed 'outdoorsman-like'), but the increase of weight , (and shape? please no tetrus clone back pack grids!) that can be hypothetically carried. Perhaps there would be, how the load would affect the march progress and at what price of resources, as in the necessity of more than one canteen. Perhaps the "packs' would be 'dropped' in combat with an option to repack on an area inventory spread sheet after the conclusion. Nearness to 'impedimenta' drop points would validate whether the NPC or PC could access this resource and at what "movement point' or time "t" during action. Time's up! 4too snip... The system definately encourages NPC's to help you do the things you're not good at And if you want to be able to go through the game alone, which should probably still be possible, you would need to be an all-rounder, eg 50% in everything, because the skills required to complete at least he main quest Should require all skills evenly. Many say they want to be able to complete the game as a theif or a sledgehammer madman only...But allowing that is nearly impossible to balance a full length game. I mean how do you balance that to allow a barterer type character to complete the game? impossible. And so being forced to be an all-rounder is really a fair tradeoff for doing everything single handedly. - I don't see what the big deal is with friendly fire... Sure it would make sense if they hit you once they would be intelligence enough to try from a different angle, but normally all you have to do is move out of the way... If you want someone to use a powerful burst weapon you'll also have to ajust yourself to its use and its sideeffects... Perfectly sensible isn't it? I let my npc's use both burst weapons, rocket launchers and flamethrowers to great effect... Of course it goes wrong occasionally, but all in good spirit really. Save often and if possible save before a fight to give you the ability to prepare and switch strategy if necesssary... Hell, even if I win a fight, I find myself loading just to see the coolness all over again... Of course if you can die a lot and very easily, you should also have a very quick reload feature... something alot of games could really use or improve on... - My main grievance with NPC's though, is there's often too much micromanagement... Sometimes it's fun - most of the time it's tedious... Order them to use flamethrower or else whatever gun available and to hoard their own ammo for the rest, or a pool-together menu you can occasionally open and let them take turn on who gets what in an automated kind of way, or a combination or other.. - Learn by doing though is nothing really new, morrowind for instance also uses it - using bow and arrow increases your marksman skill etc... I just think the problem with forever increasing xp is you become way too powerful and eventually the challenge is taken out of the game. Increasing the difficulty of enemies, like commoners to have laser guns instead of spears just seems like a really silly solution... Friendly fire: just endured some venting on that and am happy to share! A big relevation in the FO's was when Outdoorsman was built up enough and one had more manouvering room during encounters. It must be some sort of unbearable frustration for the 'uber-shooter" PC to first MOVE to establish a firing line that minimizes friendly fire. It's the claim that it unrealistically inhibits their tactical options, and denies them their constitutional right to arm NPC's with auto fire weapons, that cripples my empathy brain center. The intolerable suffering of delayed gratification in shredding opponents with auto fire, because they must assume the tactical "leadership' and MOVE first, is not anyone's problem but theirs. Trade offs with unforeseen dividends in character building: It wasn't until the second, or so, restart, or, replay, that one normally sees that a character development system was flexible enough to allow for changes in style. Average to middle high in certain attributes could be coupled with "special" items or consumables to qualify (momentarily) for conditional minimums. All Around, middle of the road planing might be the best, first, character if the system allows adjusting player focus "in game". If Charisma was 'just' high enough, the Magnetic Personality Perk and the Mirrored Sunglasses allowed for a maximum party size. I'm not sure if Charisma alone significantly helped bartering in the early game when the struggle to equip was critical. Any 'plan' to stack the bartering deck by skill points would meet the basic need of surviving encounters by fight or flight, or .. the last save. The level up skill points were channeled to combat skills to achieve a tolerable level of proficiency, and a limited restart from 'saves'. The "risk" of spreading points evenly was padded by having good or better attributes that supported blocks of skills. Agility was an obvious enhancer, but the sleeper was Intelligence. Intelligence opened up the dialogue tree, and either made certain quests available or allowed a cost effective resolution to quests. Intelligence and science got the computers to open up. Depending on NPC's only went so far. I'm not sure if Myron was as big a help as Vic in their specialties. Myron never got me the combat implants or the best 'bot' brain. Vic fixed stuff. Doctor might get some points for bone mending on the trail, until the clue of the Med Computer at Vault City would entice one to increase that skill to discover the unknown data (combat implants). Intelligence also increased the number of skill points per leveling. I think the skill or experience point enhancer perks were too limited, or broken in the case of FOT, to justify that route. 'Gifted' was a must trait, and has been considered too 'uber' by some. At the risk of chemical dependency and, or, long periods of 'hangover' negatives on attributes, "drugs" were a consumable enhancer. Drugs might help get the marginal hand to hand character through the boxing quest in New Reno and the 'Bruce Lee" quest in San Fran. Mentats were worth trying for those nasty locks or that extra Charisma needed to add an NPC to the party. The other consumables, "books" increased first aide, small weapons, outdoorsman, and repair, allowing leveling skill points to go towards achieving above average functionality in other skills, like Doctor, or Energy Weapons, always handy for the end game. I would prefer a limited 'learn by doing" enhancer. Puts some skills at a reasonable functioning level and gives a clue on what percentages of proficiency might unlock quests. A limit inhibits the building of "Uber" characters that bulldoze through the game, in a defacto "god mode", unless one wants to invest in experience point mining, and max out that way. That suits some people's game play but like your dislike of micro managing NPC's I consider mining spawning grounds as tedious and boring, not the pay off I seek in game playing. There was a "learn by doing" curve in the FO's, the discovery of all the methods of "stat" building that rewarded the well rounded character with multiple paths of adventure, without multiple restarts, all that tedious early levels rat killing ... 4too >Friendly fire: just endured some venting on that and am happy to share! > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >assume the tactical "leadership' and MOVE first, is not anyone's problem >but theirs. They are right. If you are about to confront some hostile guys you don't march up to them in single file. A high outdoorsman skill should mean more warning which means more time to plan and prepare. I think you should be able to deploy your NPCs where you want with restrictions depending on your outdoorsman skill. It's just dumb to choose to engage some bandits and then attack them in a little bunch. >Trade offs with unforeseen dividends in character building: > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >channeled to combat skills to achieve a tolerable level of proficiency, >and a limited restart from 'saves'. Charisma was used in calculating your "Bartering" skill. Signature.-'`-. / | | \ / | | \ |___|_|__ | ||<o>| <o>`| || J_ )| `|`-'__`-'|/ | `--' | .-| |_ .-' \ / | |`-. .-' `. /| | \ / ````' | | \ |_____ | | L .-' ___ `-. F F | | ||`-.___ .'.-' | `-. `. J J / | || _.> / /| | |`. \ | | |/ | ||_.-' / / | | | `. `. F F | |============================== J / | | | \ L J J | | `:::::::. `:::::::. FJ | | | |L J/ / | \ :::::::. :::::::\ J |() | () | () | () | J L/ | | ::::::: :::::::L | F | .-'_ \ | | LJ | / L :::::::: :::::::J | L | / \\ | | | L | | :::::::: ::::::::L | L || ):|| | | | /| L :::::::: ::::::::| J | ||:._.'::|| | | |----' | | :::::::: ::::::::| .---. J | |J:::::::|| | | | _/\ | :::::::: ::::::::| /(@ o`. LJ | \:::::/ | | | |---'\ | | :::::::: ::::::::| | /^^^ J L | `-:-' | | | F | \ | J :::::::: ::::::::| \ . \vvv LJ()| () | () | () | F F | \ \--._L :::::::: ::::::::| \ `--' J \ | | | | J J \ | | :::::::: ::::::::| \ `. \ \| | | | / / | | | :::::::: ::::::::| L \ \ \ | | |/ /| | | .-'| :::::::: ::::::::| | \ `.`. | | .'.' | | |/ /`L :::::::: ::::::::| | L | `.`-.____|.-'.-' | | | <`. \ :::::::: ::::::::| | | | | `-.______.-' | \| |_`::\ `. :::::::: ::::::::| F | | J\ | | | | /: \::. \:::::::: ::::::::F / | | L\|--| | _.--|:: `::\ `.:::::: .:::::::J / F J J |\\|-.____ |__.-' |: \::. \:::: ::::::::F .' J L \| >|| `--' J |' .`::\ `.:' .::::::::/ .' F J |//JJ | L |---. .--\::. \---. .---. <---< J L |< |J |\=/| ( _ \=/ _ `::\ `. \=/ _ \=/ _ \ / J |\\|J | | / )_) | (_) \::. \ | (_) | (_) | / \ |--|J |//\\ / //\ //`::\ `./\ //\ / .' \| |L ` )/ )` `' '|`---// `---// `\::. \ `---// `---' .' VK________| L_\ ' /___/ ' | |___//______//_____`::\ |___//_________.'_________ F F J`` -'| | | | | \:_| `-' | "" | J ` | | | L | |\ |\ /| /| |\ /| | | \ | | \ | \ // // | \ || |\ J | `. | ||\\ ||\\ // // ||\\ || || L F )`---\ || >> || \\ / | << || \\ || || | J / `. ||// || || //|| \\ || || || || J J ( `-. |// | \ || |/ || \\ | \ || || || `-.__/ `---. `. |<< ||\\|| || >> ||\\|| || || | J `. ) ||\\ || \ | || // || \ | || || / | `-----' || >> || || || // || || \\ || / F ||// || || || << || || \\|| J J | / |/ || |/ \\ |/ || \ | J | |/ \| \| \| \| `-.-' K I N G O F T H E M O N S T E R S >>>You could base XP rewards on the player's ... >> ... [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] >all that experimental excitement of what Big F'ing Gun he'd pull and to >what disastrous or illustrious effect. Those are solutions? Steal the dangerous toys away from your retarded team mates? Or don't give them anything that can be misused? >My limited experience with firearms may give me a real world respect of >the possibility of jamming, misfire, missing, and hitting an unintended [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >would DEMAND auto fire if it gave the NPC's the confidence to return >fire and not start digging, or running for China. Accuracy isn't the issue. NPCs shouldn't even be trying to autofire through their team mates. It's just dumb behaviour. >The party members would be less pack mules and 'meat shields' if their >skill contributions allowed your sniper to hone that point target [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >'doc' to equip a heavier fire weapon, and have enough 'hand - eye" >coordination to shoot with effect when that was needed in the end game. Jagged Alliance 2 and many roguelikes have this. I think even Wasteland may have. >The baggage train ... >An interesting reward for loading down your character and the NPC's [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >points would validate whether the NPC or PC could access this resource >and at what "movement point' or time "t" during action. Sounds just like Jagged Alliance 2. Signature.-'`-. / | | \ / | | \ |___|_|__ | ||<o>| <o>`| || J_ )| `|`-'__`-'|/ | `--' | .-| |_ .-' \ / | |`-. .-' `. /| | \ / ````' | | \ |_____ | | L .-' ___ `-. F F | | ||`-.___ .'.-' | `-. `. J J / | || _.> / /| | |`. \ | | |/ | ||_.-' / / | | | `. `. F F | |============================== J / | | | \ L J J | | `:::::::. `:::::::. FJ | | | |L J/ / | \ :::::::. :::::::\ J |() | () | () | () | J L/ | | ::::::: :::::::L | F | .-'_ \ | | LJ | / L :::::::: :::::::J | L | / \\ | | | L | | :::::::: ::::::::L | L || ):|| | | | /| L :::::::: ::::::::| J | ||:._.'::|| | | |----' | | :::::::: ::::::::| .---. J | |J:::::::|| | | | _/\ | :::::::: ::::::::| /(@ o`. LJ | \:::::/ | | | |---'\ | | :::::::: ::::::::| | /^^^ J L | `-:-' | | | F | \ | J :::::::: ::::::::| \ . \vvv LJ()| () | () | () | F F | \ \--._L :::::::: ::::::::| \ `--' J \ | | | | J J \ | | :::::::: ::::::::| \ `. \ \| | | | / / | | | :::::::: ::::::::| L \ \ \ | | |/ /| | | .-'| :::::::: ::::::::| | \ `.`. | | .'.' | | |/ /`L :::::::: ::::::::| | L | `.`-.____|.-'.-' | | | <`. \ :::::::: ::::::::| | | | | `-.______.-' | \| |_`::\ `. :::::::: ::::::::| F | | J\ | | | | /: \::. \:::::::: ::::::::F / | | L\|--| | _.--|:: `::\ `.:::::: .:::::::J / F J J |\\|-.____ |__.-' |: \::. \:::: ::::::::F .' J L \| >|| `--' J |' .`::\ `.:' .::::::::/ .' F J |//JJ | L |---. .--\::. \---. .---. <---< J L |< |J |\=/| ( _ \=/ _ `::\ `. \=/ _ \=/ _ \ / J |\\|J | | / )_) | (_) \::. \ | (_) | (_) | / \ |--|J |//\\ / //\ //`::\ `./\ //\ / .' \| |L ` )/ )` `' '|`---// `---// `\::. \ `---// `---' .' VK________| L_\ ' /___/ ' | |___//______//_____`::\ |___//_________.'_________ F F J`` -'| | | | | \:_| `-' | "" | J ` | | | L | |\ |\ /| /| |\ /| | | \ | | \ | \ // // | \ || |\ J | `. | ||\\ ||\\ // // ||\\ || || L F )`---\ || >> || \\ / | << || \\ || || | J / `. ||// || || //|| \\ || || || || J J ( `-. |// | \ || |/ || \\ | \ || || || `-.__/ `---. `. |<< ||\\|| || >> ||\\|| || || | J `. ) ||\\ || \ | || // || \ | || || / | `-----' || >> || || || // || || \\ || / F ||// || || || << || || \\|| J J | / |/ || |/ \\ |/ || \ | J | |/ \| \| \| \| `-.-' K I N G O F T H E M O N S T E R S > Accuracy isn't the issue. NPCs shouldn't even be trying to autofire > through their team mates. It's just dumb behaviour. NPC's and friendly fire ... Yes. It was a frustratingly stupid ... ah ... puzzle. At least it wasn't -another- jumping puzzle. [What god of gaming was "p'ed on" to have been earned the eternal damnation of jumping puzzles for all gamers?] In FO-1, the large hand guns and single fire were a compromise necessary to maintain a party larger than ... one ... and, to continue the game. We don't have to, have liked doing that. Completing the game was more important then the "flaw" in NPC AI, whether it was intended or an oversight. The "trying (not) to auto fire through their team mates" was partially resolved in FO-2. At least Sulik would switch to single rounds after he leveled up, well most of the time. And that's as much of a redemption as we can expect. Marcus's talent with energy weapons was too valuable to deny him the Turbo Laser, so although it was 'entertaining' to give him a variety of big guns to choose from, for he did 'seem' to switch from time to time, getting on with the game meant limiting his weapon's options. ......... FO-1, the trading with NPC's in your party was done by "stealing". Once I discovered how this was done, how - trading - was done, what it was called didn't matter. The point, click, and scrolling, and clicking and scrolling, and so forth, became part of the game. Have seen buckets of bandwidth wasted on "the horror of" --- "STEALING" --- or rather, trading, and or bartering with NPC-s in and out of the party. The horror of stealing(?) ... as if it affected the karma count. Just another puzzle solved. 4too # 4too > Marcus's talent with energy weapons was too valuable > to deny him the Turbo Laser, so although it was 'entertaining' to give > him a variety of big guns to choose from, for he did 'seem' to switch > from time to time, getting on with the game meant limiting his weapon's > options. In my game, Marcus wouldn't use the laser minigun, nor many other weapons. I only got him to use the flamethrower (which did about 3 damage towards the end) and his original minigun. SignatureToby > > Accuracy isn't the issue. NPCs shouldn't even be trying to autofire > > through their team mates. It's just dumb behaviour. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >wasn't -another- jumping puzzle. [What god of gaming was "p'ed on" to >have been earned the eternal damnation of jumping puzzles for all gamers?] I really like jumping puzzles in platformers. As long as they're not the "run up and jump at the very last moment" kind. This dude I know from IRC wrote this one http://modarchivestory.ni2.se/ It's totally kick a.s and should be on the GBA. I also liked doing crazy acrobatic sh.t in the Tomb Raider games and Flashback. >In FO-1, the large hand guns and single fire were a compromise necessary >to maintain a party larger than ... one ... and, to continue the game. >We don't have to, have liked doing that. Completing the game was more >important then the "flaw" in NPC AI, whether it was intended or an >oversight. I don't think it was intended to be a compromise. BIS just really suck at coding. >The "trying (not) to auto fire through their team mates" was partially >resolved in FO-2. At least Sulik would switch to single rounds after he [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >The horror of stealing(?) ... as if it affected the karma count. Just >another puzzle solved. People weren't complaining because stealing is bad. It did have an effect on game play - it made it tedious and annoying to get stuff from your teammates. Especially if your character sucked at stealing. Signature.-'`-. / | | \ / | | \ |___|_|__ | ||<o>| <o>`| || J_ )| `|`-'__`-'|/ | `--' | .-| |_ .-' \ / | |`-. .-' `. /| | \ / ````' | | \ |_____ | | L .-' ___ `-. F F | | ||`-.___ .'.-' | `-. `. J J / | || _.> / /| | |`. \ | | |/ | ||_.-' / / | | | `. `. F F | |============================== J / | | | \ L J J | | `:::::::. `:::::::. FJ | | | |L J/ / | \ :::::::. :::::::\ J |() | () | () | () | J L/ | | ::::::: :::::::L | F | .-'_ \ | | LJ | / L :::::::: :::::::J | L | / \\ | | | L | | :::::::: ::::::::L | L || ):|| | | | /| L :::::::: ::::::::| J | ||:._.'::|| | | |----' | | :::::::: ::::::::| .---. J | |J:::::::|| | | | _/\ | :::::::: ::::::::| /(@ o`. LJ | \:::::/ | | | |---'\ | | :::::::: ::::::::| | /^^^ J L | `-:-' | | | F | \ | J :::::::: ::::::::| \ . \vvv LJ()| () | () | () | F F | \ \--._L :::::::: ::::::::| \ `--' J \ | | | | J J \ | | :::::::: ::::::::| \ `. \ \| | | | / / | | | :::::::: ::::::::| L \ \ \ | | |/ /| | | .-'| :::::::: ::::::::| | \ `.`. | | .'.' | | |/ /`L :::::::: ::::::::| | L | `.`-.____|.-'.-' | | | <`. \ :::::::: ::::::::| | | | | `-.______.-' | \| |_`::\ `. :::::::: ::::::::| F | | J\ | | | | /: \::. \:::::::: ::::::::F / | | L\|--| | _.--|:: `::\ `.:::::: .:::::::J / F J J |\\|-.____ |__.-' |: \::. \:::: ::::::::F .' J L \| >|| `--' J |' .`::\ `.:' .::::::::/ .' F J |//JJ | L |---. .--\::. \---. .---. <---< J L |< |J |\=/| ( _ \=/ _ `::\ `. \=/ _ \=/ _ \ / J |\\|J | | / )_) | (_) \::. \ | (_) | (_) | / \ |--|J |//\\ / //\ //`::\ `./\ //\ / .' \| |L ` )/ )` `' '|`---// `---// `\::. \ `---// `---' .' VK________| L_\ ' /___/ ' | |___//______//_____`::\ |___//_________.'_________ F F J`` -'| | | | | \:_| `-' | "" | J ` | | | L | |\ |\ /| /| |\ /| | | \ | | \ | \ // // | \ || |\ J | `. | ||\\ ||\\ // // ||\\ || || L F )`---\ || >> || \\ / | << || \\ || || | J / `. ||// || || //|| \\ || || || || J J ( `-. |// | \ || |/ || \\ | \ || || || `-.__/ `---. `. |<< ||\\|| || >> ||\\|| || || | J `. ) ||\\ || \ | || // || \ | || || / | `-----' || >> || || || // || || \\ || / F ||// || || || << || || \\|| J J | / |/ || |/ \\ |/ || \ | J | |/ \| \| \| \| `-.-' K I N G O F T H E M O N S T E R S Yes, I remember liking Tomb Raider 3, so I best refrain from absolute statements or I'll be trapped in a jumping-platform game! The puzzle in BG:DA was an interesting exercise in observing the rythmns of the platforms and then "seeing" the telegraphing shake. Got through before the kid did, so competition complimented the reward. "The horror of stealing", I think this was a recent sub text I detected on a NMA thread. It can't be applied to the majority. You are right, this work around was tedious. But I think the Mac version, my most recent replay, was ok if you had 25 or so in steal. Scrolling through all the FO inventories pushed one to use the keyboard more. I think there was a thread on Something Awful when Van Buren was announced that dumped on all the least liked faults of the FO's. Quite the 'love fest" and amazing in how many warts we have endured to play these games. 4too >> You could base XP rewards on the player's level so an easy quest always >> gives you a relatively small amount of XP and a hard quest always gives [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] >depth if you can find it "whereever" when there are more 'obvious' locations >where it Should be located; at the center of the bad guys base, of course. Then make the base layout and location random. The original issue could also be solved if the developers had bothered to put some obstacle that only high level players could get around in front of the power armour. >I definately wanna find "Spiders Bane" sword in the spiders nest (Baldurs >Gate) and not some other place less fitting. That doesn't really seem like a logical place to find a Spider's Bane sword though :P >Why would I fight my way through the most gargantuan monster as soon as I >can, if all I find is some "leveled" garbage? Sure it may still a bit be >better because of the increased risk, but it won't be the best of the best. >And worse yet, later on find something better on a lesser monster (doh)... >(*see bottom of this post for some thoughts on something of a solution to >what difficulty monsters should have and more). That's what "depths" are for - so the reward will match the challenge. >The Elder Scrolls series (Morrowind etc) has both random and static loot... >Most containers (chests, barrels, etc) are completely randomized based on [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >ridiculous. Sure loading and saving is already sort of a "cheat", but it >doesn't have to be that freaking exploitable. Hiding high level equipment in places that you are only meant to know about when you have progressed far into the game is even more exploitable. >> What I would like to see more of in RPGs is choice. Not necessarily >> about the order in which to do quests but the way to do things. So many [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >well, that's double exponentiality, and while that may not be so bad per se, >it is just Time they don't have... That's because they don't write the script until they have already started development. How many directors start making a film before the script is written? Almost all PC games are like those "summer blockbuster" movies. A few hours of the latest special effects and nothing else. After playing a few times it gets boring so they can sell you a sequel. >Thanks to the hardware industry and Carmark type folks the comercial game >industry is pushed in the direction of smaller and prettier... and yet >development costs soars, despite higher level languages, all the resources >you could dream of in form of purchasable assets (engines) and open source >enmassing like never before. It's an arms race. >If content creation is really the culprit in all of this (although I think >it's bull), then it will have to be made more automated... And if this [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >Spears still hurt humans no matter how much "experience" (XP) you have. Hitpoints are a weird concept. Getting more hitpoints is supposed to reflect your battle experience and ability to avoid being killed. Wouldn't this be better reflected by having the PC avoid being shot in the head than being able to take head shots without flinching? >I'd like that to still be true. >Because I hate cliff racers. and rats. and goblins that you will undoubtly [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >That's why I personally feel the current Level and XP based systems are >crap. In some games like Arcanum random foes simply run away if you are more powerful and you don't have to fight them. Do you suggest that the player never gets any better at fighting and rats are always dangerous? >If there is no "levels" of any sort though it may be difficult to keep you >from going straight through the game though by skipping areas, so we do sort [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >the the story and experiences come into focus instead of endless >xp-mining... How is building up a reputation through fighting, questing etc different to building up XP through doing those things? >However, this will take some serious thought and scripting if to keep it >from being too linear (but doable none the less). [quoted text clipped - 67 lines] >you do things very bad, fail a lot, do jinxed stuff, wear jinxed items, you >will end up with "jinxed" character. If they are already failing at everything how will that make the character any different to before they were "jinxed"? >Or instead if you have low intelligence and low agility you're likely to end >up less lucky too cos you're clumbsy. or something.... [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >comedy movie... I'm a sniper. An incredibly bad sniper. Rated R for: >Retarded... If you wanted to play a sniper why would you make him crap at sniping? |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message